Traditionally, scholars have associated linguistic purism – the ideology that opposes borrowing and contact-induced change – with standardised languages of international currency (Thomas 1991; Walsh 2016). However, ideologies of language separation have also been found amongst speakers of un(der)-standardised languages and in the absence of formal education (Jaffe 2003; Aikhenvald 2001). While some scholars have denounced the application of Western ideologies of language separation to the study of non-Western contexts, others have shown that, after all, such ideologies might not be a preserve of Western epistemologies.

This paper interrogates understandings of purism and its relation to standardisation from the vantage point of Martinique (French Caribbean), where French is spoken alongside a French-lexicon Creole that is only partially standardised. As part of a larger online study of language attitudes and perceptions, we probed respondents’ degree of:

• purism towards French and Creole, using Likert scale statements such as ‘When one speaks French/Creole, one should avoid expressions that are clearly Creole/French’;
• association of Creole with traditional low-status indexicalities (old/rural speakers).

Results from 123 respondents show that, contrary to expectations, reported purism is higher for Creole than for French, while traditional low-status indexicalities remain prevalent. These results raise important questions about the nature of purism in Martinique and similar settings. Explaining Creole purism as a by-product of French standard language ideology seems counterintuitive, given the comparatively modest degree of French purism. We therefore draw on questionnaire- and interview-based data to propose a different explanation – one that attributes Creole purism to a combined effect of its function of identity marker and (perceived) ‘endangerment’.

By challenging the default association of purism with Western, standardised languages, this paper encourages scholars of minoritised languages to investigate purism alongside other language attitudes, for a better grasp of purist ‘motives’ and their relation with fear of language/identity loss.